From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26444 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2004 00:38:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26381 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2004 00:38:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.22.40) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Jun 2004 00:38:40 -0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 446C2400780; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 20:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:38:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: top-level removal of dejagnu, expect Message-ID: <20040610003839.GB13254@coe.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040610092223.A1221@mailhub.air.net.au> <200406092340.i59Ne3FT028298@greed.delorie.com> <20040610101446.B3128@mailhub.air.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040610101446.B3128@mailhub.air.net.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00206.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 10:14:46AM +1000, Ben Elliston wrote: >> 1. Have you asked EVERY project that uses the src repository? >> binutils and gdb aren't the only projects. Why not just remove >> those directories from the modules file instead? cgf has already >> mentioned that src/expect has cygwin-specific code in it. > >I have asked the major players and got overwhelming support. Removing >the directories from the modules file is broken, as you know. It >should be possible to check those files out if they were included in a >past tag (which they were). > >As for Expect, the version in src/expect has not been updated since >sourceware was instated last century :-) There are much newer versions >which carry fixes for some of the problems that are being reported. I >am pushing all patches made since the import to Don Libes and do not >intend to drop any. I found a couple of patches related to Cygwin. >Many of them were removed by Chris Faylor in 2001, however. I think DJ removed a few, too. The basic problem was that expect was trying to invent ptys on Windows. Since cygwin already has ptys, a lot of code could go away. >> 2. Our internal repository has a customized dejagnu; it would be >> convenient for us if support for an in-tree dejagnu were >> maintained. Likewise for other developers who may want to (or need >> to) customize dejagnu for new ports in conjunction with porting the >> tools. > >I stated at the GCC Summit that, as a DejaGnu maintainer, I will be >responsive to urgent bug fixes. I appreciate that. Those fixes can >be made available via the Savannah CVS server, or I can push out >maintenance releases as required. No one felt this was a problem. If it was anyone else but you Ben, I might have reservations. I know that you will be enthusiastically responsive to any problems. >> So, I would prefer that support for an in-tree dejagnu were >> retained. Even if dejagnu and expect were totally wiped from the >> src repository, the toplevel changes would not be needed to support > >An in-tree dejagnu is a pain to maintain. The last six months have >demonstrated this. I merged the two dejagnu trees at the end of >January and since then, have struggled to keep them in sync. That's why I can't object too strongly to this. I don't like mirroring other people's repositories on sourceware since it just guarantees drift. Readline suffers similarly. So, even if it causes a little pain now, the net gain should be worth it. cgf